RE: History of the Labor Movement in the U.S.A.

RE: History of the Labor Movement in the U.S.A. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

corysub -> RE: History of the Labor Movement in the U.S.A. (1/3/2009 8:02:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MzMia Hiya FDD, I started this thread because of a similar thread that was going. It was many OTHER anti-union folks that seemed to have forgot how many of the working conditions were before the labor movement. Do you only start threads about subjects you just heard or read about? I also found the TRIANGLE fire interesting. I am a life-long reader and I love history. I would be lying if I told you I remember every single thing that I learned in high school or college over 20 years ago. [:)] Like anything else, I don't think a "union" is the "end all and be all" for the working man. Sure, powerful unions have done a great deal to enhance the work place, make it safer, and get corporations to give extra benefits. There are also thousands of companies withhout unions, and we have seen a significant deterioration in union membership over the past 20-30 years. Many studies have been done on this subject but it was the workers themselves that rejected the unions. Over time, workers began to distrust the unions representing them, managements rose to the ocassion and non-agricultural union membership dropped from about 30% in 1970 to low teens. The danger that a too strong union poses to the worker can be seen in the U.S. auto industry which has been priced out of the market by wage and benefit expenses double foreign auto manufactureres building cars in the southern states that are non-union. It goes beyond actual salaries and benefits which total over $70hour, but also "work banks" in which workers just sat all day even though there was no work and received 95% of their compensation. The battle now is going to be when the democrat party introduces legislation to take away the right of a worker to vote in secret for or against unionization of his job. This is totally unfair, but withhout such legislation unions would continue to be rejected by most of the rank and file non union workers. However, this is "payback" by the democrat party for the tens of millions of dollars contributed to political campaigns. The unions know full well of the meaning of the phrase "pay to play"...and boy they have payed with workers dues in spades!

bluesgun -> RE: History of the Labor Movement in the U.S.A. (1/3/2009 8:43:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: bluesgun Personally I think every industry should be a union shop. Then I am thankful you don't have a say in the matter. Minimum wage is just a way for the greedy buisness owner to say "If I could pay you less I would,but its against the law." That doesn't even make sense. Workplace safety would be gone if not for unions, factories and construction sites would be the equivelent of death row. So all the non union factories are equall to death row? Is that what your saying? Why don't you give us a couple of examples of these terrible non union shops. And while you are at it, explain how the Nissan plant in TN does so well without a union. When unions are gone I fully expect to see the rise of slavery again Thats ok, you can expect what you want. It won't happen, but you can expect it. Wouldn't be suprised to see Bush&co. spearheading that movement considering all the right has done to eviscerate solidarity here. Well if Bush can do away with the unions, more power to him, but I doubt he will. Just my opinion. Yea, me too. Let me guess you scabbed a union workers job during a strike and are bitter that the union got it back for him. All that hate's gotta come from someplace. As luck, and the will of the people would have it we are entering a different era where the rich wont (hopefully)be able to increase their robber baron status on the backs of the working man... again,just my opinion.

thishereboi -> RE: History of the Labor Movement in the U.S.A. (1/4/2009 4:16:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bluesgun Let me guess you scabbed a union workers job during a strike and are bitter that the union got it back for him. Nope, never went after a union workers job. All that hate's gotta come from someplace. Years and years of watching the union at work. As luck, and the will of the people would have it we are entering a different era where the rich wont (hopefully)be able to increase their robber baron status on the backs of the working man... again,just my opinion. Yea I am looking forward to the end of unions also.

celticlord2112 -> RE: History of the Labor Movement in the U.S.A. (1/4/2009 10:00:14 AM)
quote: Personally I think every industry should be a union shop. Unions should be banned, and union organizers should be executed for crimes against humanity.

LadyEllen -> RE: History of the Labor Movement in the U.S.A. (1/4/2009 12:02:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: Personally I think every industry should be a union shop. Unions should be banned, and union organizers should be executed for crimes against humanity. Didnt some guy called Adolf think that way too? But my main question would be - should we include the likes of Lech Walesa in that decree? Although I would agree on balance that unions are not ideal - ideal would be cooperative rather than confrontational labour relations. But then, were it an ideal world we'd never have had unions...... E

MzMia -> RE: History of the Labor Movement in the U.S.A. (1/4/2009 12:15:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 quote: Personally I think every industry should be a union shop. Unions should be banned, and union organizers should be executed for crimes against humanity. Didnt some guy called Adolf think that way too? But my main question would be - should we include the likes of Lech Walesa in that decree? Although I would agree on balance that unions are not ideal - ideal would be cooperative rather than confrontational labour relations. But then, were it an ideal world we'd never have had unions...... E After reading about the Triangle factory, how many could not see how Unions help reform working conditions, is beyond me. I also agree that many Unions are greedy, need reforming and need to be taken to task {by the members}. But to say all Unions are just terrible, and to not see the good they have done in the past is also ignorant. Yes, Unions need to be reformed. The truth is often somewhere in the middle. Triangle Fire: Photographs & Illustrations

celticlord2112 -> RE: History of the Labor Movement in the U.S.A. (1/4/2009 12:17:59 PM)
quote: Although I would agree on balance that unions are not ideal - ideal would be cooperative rather than confrontational labour relations. But then, were it an ideal world we'd never have had unions...... The ideal would be realizing once and for all that "labour relations" is a myth, that the Marxist insistence on recognizing people only in the aggregate is nothing but a big steaming pile of shit. Individuals own, individuals work, individuals earn, individuals have value. Not "workers", not "people", not any gathering of individuals at any level. Only the individual is possessed of value. Thus, any attempt at coerced collective economic activity (i.e., unions) is a degradation of the individual and of the individual effort. As for killing off union organizers.....okay, maybe that's a bit extreme, but when idiotic inanities like "all industries should be unionized" are floating around, the extremism is necessary to restore some semblance of balance to the discussion.

celticlord2112 -> RE: History of the Labor Movement in the U.S.A. (1/4/2009 12:21:51 PM)
quote: I would urge those that hate Unions to please read in detail and look at the pictures of the bodies from the Triangle Factory Fire. I have read about it, looked at the pictures, yada yada yada. I still regard unions as unmitigated evil. Only thing a union would have accomplished is a higher body count. Unions are useless, pathetic, parasitic organizations. They deserve nothing but scorn, contempt, and the most vile of epithets.

LadyEllen -> RE: History of the Labor Movement in the U.S.A. (1/4/2009 12:26:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 Individuals own, individuals work, individuals earn, individuals have value. Not "workers", not "people", not any gathering of individuals at any level. Only the individual is possessed of value. Thus, any attempt at coerced collective economic activity (i.e., unions) is a degradation of the individual and of the individual effort. Indeed, but when one has a system where the owners do not have any regard for the good worker over the bad worker, but rather treat them all as a collective resource, the situation as compared with your characterization of unionisation is alike - only the violators of your thesis have changed. E

celticlord2112 -> RE: History of the Labor Movement in the U.S.A. (1/4/2009 12:49:53 PM)
quote: Indeed, but when one has a system where the owners do not have any regard for the good worker over the bad worker, but rather treat them all as a collective resource, the situation as compared with your characterization of unionisation is alike - only the violators of your thesis have changed. Except there is no "system". The "system" is merely an excuse for the sheeple to muddle along, mumbling about all the vile injustices of the world while never doing a damn thing to improve their own lot, choosing instead to let someone else do the work, take the risk, and suffer the greatest consequence. Even among business owners, the collectivist groupthink of unions represents the triumph of indolence over industriousness. We see that in the United States with the bizarre co-dependency of the UAW and the Big Three automakers. The CEOs and corporate execs are enablers of and enabled by the UAW--their bonuses and perquisites are "earned" chiefly through their "management" of the perverted relationship Ford, GM, and Chrysler have with the UAW. Unsurprisingly, their addiction to union idiocy is what has brought them to the verge of extinction--not merely because of distorted labor costs, but also because of the institutional inefficiency of having to constantly negotiate or negotiate around a contract that is some 400 pages in length, and requires a battalion of lawyers on both sides just to administer--lawyers for which the working stiff on the assembly line ultimately foots the bill. What Wagoner and Gettelfinger jointly refuse to acknowledge is that their personal self-interest is served by this byzantine, needlessly complex dynamic, while the interests of the workers (long term employment at a thriving company) and of the companies themselves are left to rot; what neither will admit is that they sold the UAW members a bill of goods about easy retirements and benefits that were never sustainable in the long run, and consequently many UAW members see their pensions and retirements at risk, with no safety net or backup plan to keep them whole.

LadyEllen -> RE: History of the Labor Movement in the U.S.A. (1/4/2009 1:01:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 Except there is no "system". The "system" is merely an excuse for the sheeple to muddle along, mumbling about all the vile injustices of the world while never doing a damn thing to improve their own lot, choosing instead to let someone else do the work, take the risk, and suffer the greatest consequence. There is a system - and I'm not referring to "the establishment" or such; the system is there in the form of the hierarchy necessary to get things done - a hierarchy in which workers have to be categorised according to their functions; very simplistically the blue collar are not perceived as individuals as you propose but as a single resource, all alike, and therefore not entitled to be treated differently from individual to individual. That this sort of hierarchy is enforced by the workers themselves - for none get promotion unless they fit in, whether union or bosses run the place, is regrettable, but it is a function of the system and of human society in general perhaps. Please the foreman - and not necessarily with hard work - to get ahead. The real problem is that there is always a hard core of poor workers - and they will exploit the system whether it is yours or that engendered by union activities. The good worker will always come off second best in either system, in favour of those whose efforts are directed towards ingratiation with whoever happens to hold power. E

celticlord2112 -> RE: History of the Labor Movement in the U.S.A. (1/4/2009 1:05:23 PM)
quote: very simplistically the blue collar are not perceived as individuals as you propose but as a single resource, all alike, and therefore not entitled to be treated differently from individual to individual. That perception is foolish, stupid, and categorically wrong, regardless of the direction from which it originates. Yes, that perception is widespread, but I reject even the implication that, merely because it is, it necessarily must be.

LadyEllen -> RE: History of the Labor Movement in the U.S.A. (1/4/2009 1:09:18 PM)
Touche m'dear! I just made a similar comment in response to one of your posts LOL! But I agree - it is stupid. My offer to anyone who works for me stands good - make me a million and you'll be getting a good share of it. And my offer to those who work for me towards the end game for my business (Europe wide franchsing) stands good too - a share of the pie when we get there. Sadly though, it would seem my progressive methods are of no value; playing the bastard evil boss seems the next way to go - works for many others after all E

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125